Veterans Affairs Committee on Oct. 20th, 2009

[Darragh Mogan]

I'm talking from memory here, but one major one was what happens to individuals who have disabilities that are so severe, maybe no table of disabilities can compensate for them? Their position there is that perhaps there is some merit in considering something like a catastrophic injury allowance or a payment, something that goes beyond, that recognizes terribly disfiguring injuries--quadriplegia, missing four limbs, horrible things that none of us would ever want our children or anyone to have to face--where no amount of court award, if you use court awards as a basis, or table of disability can compensate.

That's one. The other is that we have individual, customized case management plans for individuals with severe disabilities. That's within our current authority.

So those are two major themes that actually run through all four of the special needs advisory committee reports. They kind of stack--one leads to the next, to the next--and the fourth is really a summary of the previous three.

A number of really very positive suggestions are made in these reports, and we've tried to implement them within our current authority. These are our most needy customers, and they know how the system works. As I mentioned before, they are not shy about telling you how it works--or how it doesn't, sometimes.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

You say you try to best implement them within the current authority. What is the change that needs to happen to make sure that we can implement the other concerns?

[Darragh Mogan]

Well, some of what they are recommending requires authority of resource, so that would be a new change, such as this catastrophic injury payment that they have raised with us. That's a decision to be made by politicians when the evidence is put in front of them.

The others are in the case management review that we have just undergone, which is now finished and is being implemented. You'll see some reference to it, particularly where it's focused in the IPSCs, where there's a seamless integrated approach to handling those individuals from the time they are about to leave the military or from the time they know they are about to leave until they're into civilian life. There is a lot of emphasis on that.

There is a lot of emphasis on taking away what the special needs advisory group calls the bureaucratic red tape that may be there and that stands in the way. Sometimes they're right, and sometimes the desire to control and get accountability actually puts a barrier in the way of a veteran getting something they need. That's another area they're really focused on.

It is quite an interesting report, as you will see when you have a look at it.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Okay.

On the NVCAG report that was released this year, could you just give us something more in-depth on that particular one and on some of the recommendations included in that report?

[Brian Ferguson]

You could talk about the themes, perhaps.

[Darragh Mogan]

There are some major themes in there. We've talked about early intervention. We have, on the new veterans charter advisory committee, a chap named Wolfgang Zimmermann, president and CEO of the National Institute of Disability Management and Research. He's a worldwide expert on return to work, and this is what he said to us: If there's nothing else you do, make sure that some organization that has all the authority to act intervenes immediately, because you create more opportunity for an individual who needs rehabilitation by doing early intervention and early planning than by doing anything else.

You'll see that theme running through their report. Another deals with the adequacy of financial support for those who have severe disabilities. You'll see that in there. You'll also see notions that have come up from the Gerontological Advisory Council, which deals principally with older people; simply put, an integrated model of care means that a case manager should have all the authority they need to bring all the resources that are necessary into play to help an individual achieve a rehab plan.

So those are kind of the three themes--from memory, at least. It's a really long report.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

As we move forward, looking at the current status, is there anything else that you guys think needs to be done and reported on? Are there other groups, or is there a gap somewhere in what we need to analyze and see how we update the charter?

[Brian Ferguson]

Our hesitation is an indication, I guess, that we don't.... We've tried to canvass as broad a possible audience as we can in looking at gaps and issues. I'm not aware of any area that....

Do you have anything to suggest on that, Darragh?

[Darragh Mogan]

Well, you did look at practices and principles in an earlier version of this in this committee. That was helpful, and that's what we've done. To look at the new Veterans Charter equivalent for the U.K. and New Zealand and France and Italy—those people who serve in, for instance, Afghanistan, which is the current but by no means the only deployment—would be useful. You've done it. You might look very closely at what they do and compare it to see whether they have effectiveness measures that would be useful in your deliberations.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. Andrews.

Now the last slot of time is for the Conservative Party. Mr. Storseth will be sharing with Mr. McColeman.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I'll be sharing my time with the member for Brant.

Mr. Ferguson, when we left off we talked about a case study in which a former CF member continued with the public service and eight or nine years later was diagnosed with severe PTSD, by military doctors. You told me that there is a financial incentive to look after him while he goes to his rehabilitation. Is this financial incentive coming from the department, or is it coming from the civil service insurance provider?

[Brian Ferguson]

There are two possibilities.

If the individual is medically released with severe injuries from the forces, there is the possibility that it would have been through their insurance plan under SISIP, in which case it's for vocational and not for medical and psycho-social rehabilitation after they leave. Basically, in cases like that we work very closely with DND to close the loop by having our medical and psycho-social programming connect to their rehab.

If they come off rehab at the end of two years, which is the normal entitlement, they're still eligible, if they haven't completed it, to come through the Veterans Charter rehab program, because it can go on.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

This is the case even for a member who starts this process eight years down the road?

[Brian Ferguson]

Yes, that's true.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

One concern we have is with dissemination of this information to some of these guys, because a lot of them feel that they're left to their disability program, and unfortunately, insurance providers often prefer to say no rather than yes.

[Brian Ferguson]

Yes, that's understood.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Mr. McColeman.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Thank you. There are two things I'd like to clarify. I'd like to know as a committee member where we should take this as next steps. I'm hearing two things. I guess what I would really like is your opinion on these.

First of all, one thing that was just mentioned a few questions ago was the possibility of providing ex gratia payments for exceptional catastrophic situations. You don't have that ability right now. Is that correct?

[Brian Ferguson]

That's correct. We don't have that authority.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

That's something this committee could consider. The view is that those who are most severely affected by their service to this country, those who have had unbearable circumstances resulting from it, are the most important, in my mind. It's not to diminish the importance of our serving the others, but especially those.

[Brian Ferguson]

I think that theme resonates through all of the charter itself. Rather than commenting on a specific proposal, I think this committee would be well served, as was suggested earlier, by our providing a list of areas to you, of people and issues. I would commend to you the reports that are coming to us, because most of what we're learning is from that input to us. As part of your deliberations, you probably should have a good look at those, rather than hearing me comment on a specific recommendation from the report.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

That's fine. I'd just like to get into my mind conceptually a sense of where this committee might go.

The other point is that I'm trying to put some context around the notion you were talking about, which is the ability to be compassionate but yet apply the “hand up” principle so that people try to achieve independence and have responsibility in that equation. I've written it down as the committee perhaps considering guidelines—and I see them as guidelines rather than rules and such—for engagement on the part of this act; guidelines that we might provide you for engagement, to put some frame of reference around this.

Is that what you're looking for?

[Brian Ferguson]

I think that articulates it very well, sir. I think something along those lines from the committee would be most appreciated.

[Phil McColeman, Conservative, Brant, ON]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you, Mr. McColeman.

I understand the Liberal Party has no more questions.

Mr. Gaudet, do you have a question?

Mr. Stoffer, do you have another question? Go right ahead.